Could It Be Time To Deny Black Women the Vote?

Some of the biggest blows to the
conservative cause in
the past year have often been due to the votes of Non-Whites and
women. If only white men were allowed to vote, Obama would have
never been president, world government debts would be minute because
leftist welfare spending parties would never have won elections.
…

Demanding "Could It Be Time To Deny Black Women The Vote?
would be a world wide scandal!! Demanding the opposite, to
disenfranchise white men did not cause any waves.
Whites don't have the same rights as "minorities". Nor does the
male minority have the same rights as the female majority.

/End Race Flipping. Follows true article

Some of the biggest blows to the progressive cause in the past
year have often been due to the votes of white men. If white men
were not allowed to vote, it is unlikely that the United Kingdom
would be leaving the European Union, it is unlikely that Donald
Trump would now be the President of the United States, and it is
unlikely that the Democratic Alliance would now be governing
four of South Africa’s biggest cities.

No, this is not April's fools day. Rather a serious suggestion.

It is a big mistake to allow the social justice warriors
take the high ground and call their destructive policies and
social Engineering "a
progressive cause".

It would not be necessary to deny white men indefinitely – the
denial of the vote to white men for 20 years (just less than a
generation) would go some way to seeing a decline in the
influence of reactionary and neo-liberal ideology in the world.

That is nice. After a birth jihad and lots of immigration, whites
will be out-numbered, out-voted and can vote again.

"So how did African-Americans vote in the 2016 election?
Despite President Obama telling black voters that he would take it
as a "personal insult" if they didn't cast their ballot for
Hillary Clinton, 2016 black voters didn't
coalesce behind Clinton the same way they did Obama, with
Clinton earning 88% of their vote (to Trump's 8%) as
compared to Obama's 93% in 2012." [mic]

At the same time, a denial of the franchise to white men, could
see a redistribution of global assets to their rightful owners.

Whites created all the technology, without white technology crude
oil would be as worthless as it was 500 years ago. Also, note
that according to PC, whites are not even the rightful owners of
Europe or North America!

Of course, one needs to produce the wealth first, and seemingly
only high IQ countries produce wealth.

Over the past 500 years colonialism, slavery, and various
aggressive wars and genocides, have been due to the actions of
white men.

Some research easily unearths 1000 years of aggressive wars and
slavery perpetrated by Muslims, genocides in Ruanda, genocide
by Turkey, Mass killings by communist Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot.

Redistributing some of their assets will go some way to paying the
historical debt that they owe society.

Or it could lead to collapse, if the assets are not maintained
nor produced any more. Zimbabwe, South Africa, Haiti, etc. come to
mind.

It is no surprise that liberalism – and its ideological
offshoots of conservatism and libertarianism – are the most
popular ideologies among white males. These ideologies with
their focus on individuals and individual responsibility, rather
than group affiliation, allow white men to ignore the debt that
they owe society, and from acknowledging that most of their
assets, wealth, and privilege are the result of theft and
violence.

Leftist ideology.

Some may argue that this is unfair. Let’s be clear, it may be
unfair, but a moratorium on the franchise for white males for a
period of between 20 and 30 years is a small price to pay for
the pain inflicted by white males on others, particularly those
with black, female-identifying bodies. {snip}